Judgment 1. Original Criminal Miscellaneous No. 11 of 1995 (R) originated when a Bench of this Court suo motu started proceedings for contempt against Mr. K.K. Jha Kamal Advocate of the Patna High Court practising at Ranchi Bench because Mr. K.K. Jha Kamal (for short Jha) had made derogatory remarks against Honbie Mr. Justice S.K. Chattopadhyaya of this Court. Suo motu action was taken by a Bench of this Court comprising of S.K. Homchaudhuri and Gurusharan Sharma JJ. and that was on 1.9.1995. In answer to show cause notice Jha made derogatory remarks now against Hon ble Mr. Justice S.K. Homchaudhuri and when he repeated these remarks in the proceedings, this Court again took suo motu action against Jha for having committed contempt of Court. Allegations were also made by Jha against one Advocate, Mrs. Indrani Sen Choudhary. As to how all these two proceedings were started it may be better to refer to the charges which were served upon Jha: "You are charged for having committed criminal contempt of this Court as under: 1. In C.W.J.C. No. 553 of 1995 (R) (Smt. Shakuntala Devi V/s. The Bihar State Electricity Board and others) there was a challenge to certain orders by which the services of the petitioner were terminated. This writ application was allowed by Choudhary S.N. Mishra, J. on 5.4.1995 quashing the orders terminating the services of the petitioner. The Bihar State Electricity Board filed a Letters Patent Appeal against that order (L.P.A. 93 of 1995-R) which came up for admission on 10.5.95 before a Bench of this Court comprising of S.K. Chattopadhyaya and P.K. Deb, JJ. The Bench while issuing notice to first respondent, Smt. Shakuntala Devi to show cause as to why the appeal be not admitted, stayed the operation of the impugned order dated 5.4.95. On 26.6.95 when the matter was listed before that very Bench, S.K. Chattopadhyaya, J. expressed his inability to hear the matter and it was ordered that the matter be listed before a Bench of which he was not a Member. On 18.7.95 another Bench of this Court comprising of S.K. Homchaudhuri and Guru Sharan Sharma, JJ. adjourned the matter as service was awaited and continued the interim order dated 10.5.95 until further orders. On 16.8.95 this Bench recorded your presence on behalf of the first respondent and directed that a copy of the memo of appeal be served upon you. On 18.7.95 another Bench of this Court comprising of S.K. Homchaudhuri and Guru Sharan Sharma, JJ. adjourned the matter as service was awaited and continued the interim order dated 10.5.95 until further orders. On 16.8.95 this Bench recorded your presence on behalf of the first respondent and directed that a copy of the memo of appeal be served upon you. Ultimately on 1.9.95 this very Bench admitted the appeal and confirmed the interim order dated 10.5.95 till disposal of the appeal. 2. The Bench while admitting the appeal noticed that in the counter-affidavit filed by the first respondent in the L.P.A. she stated as under: 5. That without prejudice to the aforesaid stand of the petitioner-respondent, she files this counter affidavit challenging the unfairness of the counsel of the Respondent Board, namely, Mrs. Indrani Sen Choudhary and Hon ble Mr. Justice S.K. Chattopadhyaya, who was party to the order dated 10.5.1995 passed in the matter of L.P.A. No. 93 of 1995 (R), in the facts and circumstances of this case stated hereunder. You took full responsibility of what was stated by the first respondent. The Bench of S.K. Homchaudhuri and Gurusharan Sharma, JJ. took the view that prima facie it appeared that the statement above quoted was scandalous and lowered down or tended to lower down the authority of this Court. The Bench, therefore, initiated suo motu contempt proceedings against the first respondent and you. Notices were accordingly issued to you. Respondent No. 1 filed show cause and so did you. You took full responsibility for what has been said by the first respondent and yourself. Before that Bench you admitted having filed the show cause and you stood by what was stated in the show cause. You made the following statements in the show cause: (i) That you did not commit any contempt of this Court and rather Hon ble Mr. Justice S.K.Chattopadhyaya committed contempt of his own Court as well as of the Supreme Court. (ii) That you further stated "in nut shell, the another stand of the opp. party no. 2 is that the exercise of power under the contempt provisions is nothing but outcome of a malafide of. Hon ble Mr. Justice S.K.Homchaudhuri, Hon ble Mr. Justice S.K. Chattopadhyaya and Mrs. Indrani Sen Choudhary, the learned Advocate for the respondent-Board which will be clear from the statement of facts on judicial record stated hereinafter". party no. 2 is that the exercise of power under the contempt provisions is nothing but outcome of a malafide of. Hon ble Mr. Justice S.K.Homchaudhuri, Hon ble Mr. Justice S.K. Chattopadhyaya and Mrs. Indrani Sen Choudhary, the learned Advocate for the respondent-Board which will be clear from the statement of facts on judicial record stated hereinafter". (iii) That the order dated 1.9.95 was passed by Hon ble Judges in order to injure your personal reputation as a lawyer and that "Hon ble Mr. Justice S.K. Homchaudhuri has manipulated this order in connivance with Hon ble Mr. Justice S.K. Chattopadhyaya and Mrs. Indrani Sen Choudhary, the learned counsel of the Board". (iv) That Hon ble Mr. Justice S.K. Chattopadhyaya interfered with the order of the learned single judge on 10.5.95 as a Presiding Judge of the Divisional Bench in complete disregard of an order passed by another Division Bench of this Hon ble Court on 26.4.1994 and Hon ble Supreme Court order dated 3.1.1995. You also described the order dated 10.5.95 of a Bench of this Court as a result of the malafide judicial action of Hon ble Mr. Justice S.K. Chattopadhyaya. (v) That Hon ble Mr. Justice S.K. Homchaudhuri refused to adjourn this matter when a request was made on your behalf for the same on personal and justifiable grounds which showed "that Hon ble Judges, specially Hon ble Mr. Justice S.K. Homchaudhuri were interested in that particular case for passing orders for the reasons best known to him". (vi) That the order initiating contempt of court proceeding against you was passed by Hon ble Mr. Justice S.K .Homchaudhuri in order to oblige Mrs. Indrani Sen Choudhary, Advocate for the appellant-Board. (vii) That the order dated 1.9.95 initiating contempt of Court proceeding against you "was signed on 8.9.95 by signing back dated when Hon ble Mr. Justice S.K. Homchaudhuri left for Patna and the opposite party no. 2 (you) refused to oblige him in the matter by throwing into winds all the rules, procedure and practice of the High Court in the contempt matter". By these insinuations mentioned in the show cause you cast aspersions on Hon ble Mr. Justice S.K. Homchaudhuri in the conduct of the appeal. (viii) That the order passed on 10.5.95 by a Bench of which Hon ble Mr. By these insinuations mentioned in the show cause you cast aspersions on Hon ble Mr. Justice S.K. Homchaudhuri in the conduct of the appeal. (viii) That the order passed on 10.5.95 by a Bench of which Hon ble Mr. Justice S.K. Chattopadhyaya was a senior member was the result of the alleged grudge which the Hon ble Judges was having against you on account of the fact that you had filed certain proceedings challenging his appointment as a Judge of this Court though those proceedings were dismissed. You assumed that Hon ble Mr. Justice S.K. Chattopadhyaya knew that you were a counsel for the first respondent before the learned single Judge when at the time of passing the order dated 10.5.95 there was nothing. on the record to show that you had represented the first respondent before the learned single Judge. You made these allegations on the ground that Hon ble Mr. Justice S.K.Chattopadhyaya was refusing to hear the matter where you were a counsel. (ix) That by various averments made in the show cause you have questioned the honesty and integrity of Hon ble Mr. Justice S.K.Chattopadhyaya in dealing with the appeal on 10.5.1995. (x) That you have stated that the order dated 10.5.95 by Hon ble Mr. Justice S.K. Chattopadhyaya was passed malafidely and in connivance with Mrs. Indrani Sen Choudhary "just to lower down the status of the opp-party no. 2 (you) in the eyes of his client, Opp. party no. 1, and with a view to injure the professional reputation of the opp. party no. 2 (you) as a lawyer of this Court who is enjoying a very high reputation as a vehement fighter lawyer for the cause of his client at Patratu from where the opp. party no. 1 comes." (xi) As a matter of fact, the whole of the show cause is full of averments directed against Hon ble Mr. Justice S.K. Homchaudhuri and Hon ble Mr. Justice S.K. Chattopadhyaya as Judges of this Court while dealing with the aforesaid L.P.A. No. 93 of 1995 (R). (xii) In para 103 of the show cause you appear to have summed up the whole matter as under: "...the order dated 1.9.1995 passed in the matter of Org. Cr. Misc. No. 11/95 (R), is an outcome of malafide exercise of power by a Division Bench presided over by Hon ble Mr. (xii) In para 103 of the show cause you appear to have summed up the whole matter as under: "...the order dated 1.9.1995 passed in the matter of Org. Cr. Misc. No. 11/95 (R), is an outcome of malafide exercise of power by a Division Bench presided over by Hon ble Mr. Justice S.K. Homchaudhuri in person as well as Hon ble Mr. Justice S.K. Chattopadhyaya in connivance with Mrs. Indrani Sen Choudhary, the learned counsel of the Board to injure the professional reputation of the opposite party no. 2 as a lawyer of this Court as well as the order dated 1.9.1995 is irregular, illegal, unauthorised, and contrary to procedure and rules framed by the Hon ble High Court under the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 and prays to this Hon ble Court on that basis that the instant proceeding against the opp. parties no. 1 and 2 deserves to be dropped in the interest of justice, fairness and to protect the dignity and authority of this Hon ble Court in the eyes of the people, to maintain the public confidence in the institution of higher judiciary, for which the opp. party no. 2 has also been relentlessly fighting to preserve dignity of this Hon ble Court by way of fairly criticising judicial actions of certain Hon ble Judges who are proving liability for the institution of higher judiciary." 3. Though the show cause filed by you was in reply to the notice issued to you as to why contempt of court proceeding be not initiated against you, you have made therein statements against Hon ble Judges of this Court which scandalise or tend to scandalise or lower or tends to lower down the authority of this Court or these statements made in the show cause interfere or tends to interfere in due course of judicial proceedings and amount to criminal contempt. By asserting that you stood by what you stated in the show cause you have committed a criminal contempt in our presence." 2. When this Court found that Jha had committed contempt in face of this Court on 28.11.95 which was a criminal contempt, he was taken into custody and then on prayer made on his behalf he was released on his executing a personal bond. This was registered as Original Criminal Misc. No. 15 of 1995 (R). When this Court found that Jha had committed contempt in face of this Court on 28.11.95 which was a criminal contempt, he was taken into custody and then on prayer made on his behalf he was released on his executing a personal bond. This was registered as Original Criminal Misc. No. 15 of 1995 (R). On request made on behalf of Jha the matter was adjourned to 30.11.95 when charges aforementioned were served upon him. 3. Mr. Mahesh Tiwary, Advocate, who appeared for Jha submitted that the matter be listed in the second week of January, 1996 when all parties had agreed that further proceedings be held at Patna. In view of the gravity of the matter, we issued notices to the President of the High Court Advocates Association, Ranchi Bench, Ranchi, Advocate General of the State of Bihar, Government Advocate, Ranchi Bench and subsequently to the Chairman, Bihar State Bar Council. Jha had already been released on his executing a personal bond. We did not insist on the presence of Smt. Shakuntala Devi as we were told that she was in advanced stage of pregnancy and Jha had taken full responsibility as to what had been said by her resulting in initiation of contempt proceedings against her as well as Jha. 4. We adjourned the matter to 12.1.1996 when Jha did not appear. We issued bailable warrant of arrest for his appearance in Court on 19.1.1996 when again he defaulted. He ultimately appeared on 29.1.1996 and tendered unconditional apology for his conduct and wanted forgiveness and prayed that contempt proceedings against him be dropped. 5. On 13.11.95 it would appear that Jha also filed a petition for taking contempt of Court proceedings against Hon ble Mr. Justice S.K. Chattopadhyaya and Hon ble Mr. Justice S.K. Homchaud- huri and also impleaded Mrs. Indrani Sen Choudhary, Advocate, Mr. Ram Lakhan Choudhary, Deputy Director of Personnel, Patratu Thermal Power Station, Patratu, Mr. Krishna Bahadur Sinha, President, Ranchi High Court Bar Association and the State of Bihar. From this petition, it would appear, Jha also wanted that contempt proceedings be initiated against Mrs. Indrani Sen Choudhary but her name had been deleted though allegations have been made against her as well as Mr. Ram Lakhan Choudhary. In this application Jha again made derogatory remarks against both the Hon ble Judges amounting to criminal contempt of Court. In this case also Mr. Indrani Sen Choudhary but her name had been deleted though allegations have been made against her as well as Mr. Ram Lakhan Choudhary. In this application Jha again made derogatory remarks against both the Hon ble Judges amounting to criminal contempt of Court. In this case also Mr. Mahesh Tiwary appeared for Jha but stated that he did not stand by what had been stated in the application. He prayed that this matter, Orgl. Cr. Misc. 13/95 (R), may also be listed along with Original Cr. Misc. 11/95 (R). In this application we issued notices to the President of the High Court Advocates Association, Ranchi Bench, Ranchi, Advocate General of the State of Bihar as well as Government Advocate, Ranchi Bench only and not to any of the respondents as such. 6. Jha had not filed any answer to the articles of charges served upon him and as noted above he tendered unconditional apology. 7. The question before us now is if the tendering of unconditional apology is bonafide and if Jha honestly regrets his conduct and further why such an apology could not have been tendered at its earliest. During the course of proceedings it also came to our notice that Jha had published a booklet titled "An appeal to the members of legal profession and fraternity in the whole country" asking for funds to fight out these contempt proceedings against him. Jha when he appeared before us on 30.1.1996 admitted that he got printed 100 copies of this booklet and distributed all over the country, to the Chairman of the Bar Council of India, State Bar Councils and Bar Associations of different High Courts. Apart from referring to the proceedings initiated against him, he started with these remarks: "Before narrating the arbitrary and whimsical judicial actions of the Division Bench of Hon ble Mr. Justice D.P. Wadhwa (the Chief Justice of Patna High Court) and Hon ble Mr. Justice S.N. Jha, the undersigned will like to state the naked facts of the case in short." We took no offence to these remarks as we thought that Jha is suffering from some sort of mental aberration. 8 No Court is in a happy position to initiate contempt proceedings against any person particularly a member of the bar. Here the Court itself is the accuser and trying the contemner for having committed contempt of court itself. 8 No Court is in a happy position to initiate contempt proceedings against any person particularly a member of the bar. Here the Court itself is the accuser and trying the contemner for having committed contempt of court itself. But then that is something which cannot be avoided. Rule of law has to be upheld. Actions of Jha amount to criminal contempt of the court. His apology has not come too soon. His attitude of defiance leads us to believe that wisdom dawned upon him too late for us to take a lenient view of the matter. An application was filed by Jha before the Joint Registrar of Ranchi Bench on 5.1.1996 seeking adjournment in the matter which was fixed on 12.1.1996 on the ground that he was moving the Hon ble Supreme Court against various orders initiating contempt of court proceedings against him. The application could not have been filed at Ranchi Bench when Jha knew that the proceedings were being held at Patna. On 29.1.1996 on our query he told us that he did file a Special Leave Petition in the Supreme Court but that had not been listed so far. We would have certainly adjourned the matter, but then Jha tendered unconditional apology and learned Advocates to whom we had issued notices prayed for a lenient view of the matter and for the matter to be dropped in view of the unconditional apology tendered by Jha. Jha said proceedings be dropped against him in the interest of the institution, but he forgot that this very institution he had tried to denigrate. He is a senior member of the bar and right from the day when Original Cr. Misc. 11 of 95 (R) originated he showed no signs of remorse or any feeling of regret for his conduct. We shall be failing in our duty if we do not uphold the majesty of law and in highest tradition for maintenance of rule of law we are not prepared to accept the apology though staled unconditional as tendered by Jha. However, though we convict Jha of having committed criminal contempt of the Court we will not incarcerate him and we will rather like that he continues his practice at the bar as a member of the noble profession to which he belongs. On these considerations we passed the following order on 30.1.96: "At the outset Mr. However, though we convict Jha of having committed criminal contempt of the Court we will not incarcerate him and we will rather like that he continues his practice at the bar as a member of the noble profession to which he belongs. On these considerations we passed the following order on 30.1.96: "At the outset Mr. Shukla, learned counsel for the contemnor submitted that the contemnor is tendering unconditional apology and that a lenient view in the matter be taken and the proceeding initiated against him be dropped. Mr. K.K. Jha Kamal, the contemnor made the following statement; I tender unconditional apology to the Court. I regret my conduct. I submit that in this view of the matter and in the interest of the institution the proceedings against me may be dropped. We heard Mr. J.P. Shukla for the contemnor, Mr. Ganga Prasad Rai, Addl. Advocate General, Mr. M.Y. Eqbal, Government Advocate, Ranchi, Mr. Braj Kishore Prasad, Chairman of the State Bar Council and Mr. K.B. Sinha, President of the Advocates Association, Ranchi Bench of the Patna High Court. All the learned counsel submitted that Mr. K.K. Jha Kamal did commit criminal contempt of the Court, but they submitted that in view . of the unconditional apology tendered by him a lenient view could be taken and the proceedings against him be dropped. No doubt, better counsel has prevailed and Mr. K.K. Jha Kamal who is a practising advocate has tendered unconditional apology. Considering, however, the grave charges and conduct of Mr. K.K. Jha Kamal we are not prepared to accept the apology though unconditional tendered today in Court. Mr. K.K. Jha Kamal is guilty of criminal contempt of the Court. We are of the opinion that ends of justice will be served if we award him punishment to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of four months. However, this order of imprisonment shall remain suspended for a period of two years during which there shall be no complaint of any contempt of court committed by Mr. K.K. Jha Kamal. In case, the Court is of the opinion that on a complaint made to it or otherwise Mr.K.K. Jha Kamal has again committed contempt of court, this order of punishment shall come into operation forthwith. The proceedings against the contemner Smt. Shakuntala Devi are hereby dropped in view of the fact that Mr. K.K. Jha Kamal. In case, the Court is of the opinion that on a complaint made to it or otherwise Mr.K.K. Jha Kamal has again committed contempt of court, this order of punishment shall come into operation forthwith. The proceedings against the contemner Smt. Shakuntala Devi are hereby dropped in view of the fact that Mr. K.K. Jha Kamal accepted full responsibility on behalf of Smt. Shakuntala Devi in making allegations which amounted to criminal contempt of court. Mr. Shukla says that Mr. K.K. Jha Kamal had filed certain applications which may be dismissed as withdrawn. We order accordingly. We further order that Org. Cr. Misc. Nos. 11 and 13 of 1995 (R) also stand concluded by this order. Detailed reasons will follows." 9 These are the reasons which led us to convict and sentence Jha for committing criminal contempt of the court and discharging proceedings against Smt. Shakuntala Devi.